Rudra all-arms brigades will make Army future-ready: Gen Dwivedi
General Dwivedi announced the establishment of 'Rudra' all arms brigades, 'Bhairav' light commando battalions, 'Shaktibaan' artillery regiments and 'Divyastra' batteries, drone-equipped infantry battalions, and indigenous air defence systems.
'Rudra is being established for which I gave an approval yesterday. Under this, we will have infantry, mechanised infantry, armoured units, artillery, special forces and unmanned aerial units at one place to provide logistics and combat support,' he said.
During his address, General Dwivedi referred to Operation Sindoor and said that it was because of the trust of the people and 'the strategic independence' extended by the government that the Army gave Pakistan an 'organised, accurate and decisive' answer after the Pahalgam attack.
'India proved (in 1999) that no ill intentions will find success within India's borders. No harm will be allowed against India's unity and integrity. In continuation of that tradition, the Indian Army displayed the same courage and determination during Operation Sindoor in targeting terrorist infrastructure within Pakistan and achieved a decisive victory by effectively thwarting Pakistan's aggressive tactics,' he said.
India gave peace a chance but the neighbouring country displayed 'cowardice' and Operation Sindoor 'was our resolve, message and response' to that, he said. He said that the Pahalgam attack, in which 26 people were killed, left a 'deep wound' on the nation but that this time, India did not just mourn their loss but resolved that the response would be decisive.
On the night of May 6 and 7, India attacked nine high-value targets in Pakistan and PoK, 'without harming any innocent citizens', he said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
7 minutes ago
- Hans India
Trump ended India-Pak war, should get Nobel Prize: WH
WASHINGTON: Donald Trump should be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt has said, claiming that the United States President ended several conflicts around the world including the one between India and Pakistan. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt speaks during a press briefing at the White House in Washington, DC, on July 31, 2025. Photograph: Since May 10, when Trump announced on social media that India and Pakistan had agreed to a 'full and immediate' ceasefire after a 'long night' of talks mediated by Washington, DC, he has repeated his claim on several occasions that he helped settle the tensions between the two countries. At a White House press briefing on Thursday, Leavitt said that Trump has 'now ended conflicts between Thailand and Cambodia, Israel and Iran, Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, India and Pakistan, Serbia and Kosovo and Egypt and Ethiopia.' She said that the president has brokered, on average, about one peace deal or ceasefire per month during his six months in office. 'It's well past time that President Trump was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize,' she said. Trump has repeated his claim nearly thirty times that he 'helped settle' the tensions between India and Pakistan and that he told the nuclear-armed South Asian neighbours that America will do a 'lot of trade' with them if they stopped the conflict. Prime Minister Narendra Modi said in Parliament this week that no leader of any country asked India to stop Operation Sindoor. External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar on Wednesday categorically said there was no third-party intervention in bringing about a ceasefire with Pakistan during Operation Sindoor, asserting that the halting of the military action was also not linked to trade as claimed by Trump. Intervening in the special discussion on Operation Sindoor in the Rajya Sabha, Jaishankar said Prime Minister Modi and Trump did not have any phone calls between April 22, when the Pahalgam terror attack took place, and June 16.
Hans India
37 minutes ago
- Hans India
Congress sleepwalks toward irrelevance and a 2029 defeat
The Congress party and it's I.N.D.I.A bloc allies have once again exposed their deep-rooted bias and misplaced priorities by mocking names like Operation Mahadev and Operation Sindoor. In their desperation to attack the government, they've stooped to questioning military operations, insulting our armed forces, and echoing hostile foreign voices like Donald Trump. From denying Pakistan's role in terror attacks to staying silent on the Malegaon verdict, the opposition's selective outrage and appeasement politics have crossed all limits. They refuse to show empathy to victims, seek justice for the falsely accused, or respect national sentiment which exposes their dangerous hypocrisy and reminds them that secularism doesn't mean shaming Hindu symbols or compromising India's integrity. They say you can wake up a sleeping person, but you cannot wake someone who is pretending to be asleep. This aptly describes the Congress party and the disjointed I.N.D.I.A bloc today. Their posturing in Parliament during the debate on Operation Sindoor and Operation Mahadev proves one thing: if they continue down this path, they are inching towards a political wipeout by 2029. Let me begin with a small anecdote. In Tamil Nadu, sworn opponents DMK and AIADMK, despite their ideological battles, once presented a united front before Singapore authorities regarding a delayed project. The Singapore officials were stunned to see both parties in the same room. The Tamil leaders simply replied, 'Our fight is only within the state. When it comes to protecting Tamil Nadu's interests, we are one.' In stark contrast, look at Andhra Pradesh's YSRCP, a Congress offshoot led by former chief minister Y S Jagan Mohan Reddy. They shamelessly wrote to Singapore, urging them to withhold investments in Andhra Pradesh, citing a potential change in government at a time when the incumbent Chief Minister and the official delegation were in talks to attract investments to the state. And in Delhi, the Congress and allies act in a similar fashion — prioritising petty politics over national interest. During the parliamentary discussion on the military operations that neutralised terrorists and upheld national honour, Congress and its allies insulted the armed forces by questioning the names of the operations — Operation Sindoor and Operation Mahadev — calling them communal and divisive. Seriously? They don't ask how our armed forces entered deep into Pakistani territory, destroyed their airbase and effectively called Pakistan's nuclear bluff and how the homemade missiles caught the attention of the world and how our forces neutralised drones. Instead, they obsess over how many aircraft India may have lost and why the operation was named 'Mahadev,' even going so far as to claim—without a shred of evidence—that five jets were downed. What a distorted sense of priorities. Some argue that terrorists don't care about religion when they kill. But how can they dismiss the words of a young widow whose husband was brutally murdered before her eyes—after the terrorists explicitly asked about their religion? Former Union Home Minister P Chidambaram even shamelessly asked, 'Where is the proof that they came from Pakistan? They could be home-grown terrorists.' Does he want to be Pakistan's defence lawyer? Is there no empathy left in the Congress leadership for the families of those who died in the Pahalgam attack? The grieving families found some solace on coming to know that the killers were neutralised. But the opposition? They were busy crafting conspiracy theories and playing communal politics. Their hatred for the current government has become so blind that they've started echoing the words of US President Donald Trump over the statements made by India's own ministers in Parliament. Trump falsely claimed on multiple occasions that he brokered peace between India and Pakistan. The opposition clowns couldn't even decide how many times Trump said it — some said 25, Rahul said 29. Maybe they should learn basic arithmetic before jumping into geopolitics. They should have also spoken about Trump's theatrics of sharing an AI-generated video of the arrest of former president of US Barack Obama, something which is not expected from people in such high positions. When Trump called India's economy 'dead,' Rahul Gandhi — ever eager to join anyone who criticises the country just to attack Prime Minister Narendra Modi — promptly echoed the statement. But Trump's comment wasn't surprising, considering that the U.S. is now courting Pakistan to explore so-called 'massive oil reserves.' This has sparked scepticism: Does Pakistan really have oil reserves significant enough to attract major American interest? Official Pakistani data tells a different story. In 2019, Pakistan produced only 89,030 barrels of crude oil per day. By 2025, this figure is projected to fall further to 64,262 barrels per day — hardly a sign of a booming oil economy. Meanwhile, what truly seems to irk the U.S. — and by extension, Trump — is that India has become the world's fourth-largest economy, trailing only the US, China and Germany. Even more disruptive was India's launch of the Unified Payments Interface (UPI) — a revolutionary digital platform that brought cashless convenience to over one billion people, many of whom never had access to traditional banking systems. While much of the developed world remains tethered to credit cards and slow, fee-laden payment models, UPI leapfrogged ahead — empowering everyone from small-time vendors to global entrepreneurs. India's digital economy is flourishing. Per capita income has doubled in the last 11 years, and the country is now a global leader in GDP growth. In such a scenario, calling the Indian economy 'dead' is not just false — it's absurd. When your country is unfairly criticised, a patriot stands up in its defence. But not Rahul Gandhi — for him, attacking Modi takes precedence over defending India. Rahul, as the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, demanded 'proof' of Operation Sindoor's success. But he must now explain a far more serious issue: Who was responsible for the 2008 Malegaon blasts? He must stop ducking the issue and apologise for maligning individuals like Lt. Col. Prasad Purohit and Major Ramesh Upadhyay, who lost 17 crucial years of their lives to false accusations. The courts have since dismissed the so-called 'saffron terror' narrative. If not them, then who was behind the blasts? Will Congress take responsibility? Will they apologise or offer restitution? Unlikely. Instead, Rahul Gandhi continues to deflect with lines like, 'Don't divert the issue. The real issue is India's economy is dead.' But that's the real tragedy — a politics devoid of accountability, humility, or truth. Sonia Gandhi, who chaired the UPA at the time, and Rahul Gandhi must break their silence. Justice delayed was grave enough — justice denied would be unforgivable. And now, the same bunch dares to call Operation Mahadev communal! Do they not know that naming military operations is the prerogative of the armed forces, often based on geography, symbolism, or historical references? Under Congress rule, there were operations like: Operation Vijay; Operation Meghdoot; Operation Shivalik and Operation Devi Shakti. Were these names not Hindu references? Were those operations communal? Of course not. Each Indian army regiment has its own battle cry: Gorkha Rifles: 'Jai Maa Kali, Ayo Gorkhali!' Rajputana Rifles: 'Raja Ram Chandra Ki Jai!' Kumaon Regiment: 'Kalika Mata Ki Jai!' Sikh Regiment: 'Bole So Nihal, Sat Sri Akal!' These are not signs of communalism — they are signs of regimental spirit, heritage, and pride. The Congress and its allies need to understand that secularism does not mean mocking Hinduism at every opportunity. It means equal respect for all religions. But unfortunately, they see religious insult only in Hindu expressions, while bending over backwards to appease others. Their attempts to peddle fear and division have backfired. Even the minorities they claim to champion see through this farce now. The Congress no longer understands the pulse of the people — their outdated politics of appeasement, victimhood, and communal blame-game have rendered them irrelevant in modern India. It's high time the Congress stops pretending to be asleep — or else, they will sleepwalk into another electoral disaster in 2029. (The author is former Chief Editor of The Hans India)
The Hindu
2 hours ago
- The Hindu
Nationalist agendas fuelled the border fight between Thailand and Cambodia
On the morning of July 24, Thai and Cambodian troops clashed at multiple locations along their 800-km border. Following five days of fighting that resulted in 43 deaths (including civilians) and the displacement of more than 300,000 people, both sides arrived at a ceasefire that took effect on July 29. Mediated by ASEAN chair Malaysia, with help from China, and under the looming threat of U.S. tariffs, the truce appeared to largely hold despite claims of breach by both parties. After the agreement came Cambodia's call on July 31 for the release of its 20 soldiers detained for crossing into Thai-held territory after the truce. Bangkok has acceded, but only upon the fulfilment of legal procedures — proof that the peace deal, despite putting a temporary halt to the fighting, is a minor respite at best. For the roots of the conflict can be traced back to pre-colonial times; and with domestic politics, international scam centres and nationalism coming to the mix, multiple interests are at stake, complicating matters further. Rise of tensions Prior to the latest clashes was the May 28 incident in which a Cambodian soldier was killed. Tensions ran high, forcing the then-Thai Prime Minister, Paetongtarn Shinawatra, to ring up strongman and Cambodia's former Premier Hun Sen on June 15 to placate the situation. As a leaked version of their conversation showed, Ms. Paetongtarn, whose family shares close ties with the Cambodian leader, sounded deferential by referring to him as 'uncle' and labelling a Thai military General as 'opponent'. The ensuing fallout, which cost Ms. Paetongtarn her job, is widely believed to have been orchestrated by Mr. Hun Sen to deflect attention from the international cyberscam centres operating in his country. Apart from inviting global scrutiny, these scam offices are also alleged to be run by the Cambodian government's allies and possess links to China — Phnom Penh's biggest benefactor. Another incentive for Mr. Hun Sen to stir the pot is to whip up nationalist sentiments and boost the credentials of his son Hun Manet, sworn to office in 2024, 33 years after his father relinquished power. For Mr. Hun Sen — who once called Ms. Paetongtarn's father and former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra his 'god brother' — Thailand, with its delicate political landscape owing to the presence of the monarchy and the military, presents itself as a soft target. Separately, Mr. Hun Sen is also accused by his opponents of adopting a soft stance towards Vietnam, whose Army in 1979 overthrew the Khmer Rouge and installed the 72-year-old Cambodian People's Party in power. Also on Mr. Hun Sen's mind is the Thai government's proposed casino legalisation Bill, which may adversely impact Cambodia's gambling sector. Thus, bringing down the Shinawatras' Pheu Thai party is a one-stop solution to all his problems and seemed plausible too, given that, with Ms. Paetongtarn suspended from duty and Mr. Thaksin facinglese majestecharges for 'insulting the monarchy', the Shinawatras are already out of favour with the Thai citizens. Nationalist rhetoric However, nationalist rhetoric is not restricted to Cambodia alone but is an overarching sentiment in Thailand, too. A 2003 remark by a Thai actress, in which she said Cambodia had 'stolen' Angkor Wat and that she would not visit the country until the monument was returned, sparked anti-Thai riots. Taken in isolation, the statement may not carry much weight. But when placed in the larger context, it reflects the overall mood of a country, which, while priding itself as the only one in the region to be not subjected to Western colonisation, still perceives itself as a victim. This is because history has been equally unkind to both Cambodia and Thailand. Between the 7th century and the 14th century, the Khmer Empire ruled over a vast tract of the mainland in Southeast Asia. During its heyday in the 12th century, the Khmer empire comprised Cambodia as well as parts of present-day northeastern Thailand and southern Vietnam. The power structure was based on the Mandala system, which consisted of concentric circles of centre-peripheral relations. Weak territoriality and a loose central authority marked the setup, writes Path Kosal in a chapter in the book,Cambodia's Foreign Relations in Regional and Global Contexts. This ensured that Angkor kings were able to rule unchallenged over their allies and vassals who presided over the periphery independently. Trouble began to brew for the Khmer empire from the time of Angkor's fall in 1431. It faced threats from Siam (Thailand), which began conquering land from the northeast, and Annam (Vietnam) from the southeast; to the point that King Norodom turned Cambodia into a French protectorate in 1863 in the hope of security. While Cambodia's apprehensions of shrinking boundaries and constant threats have roots in pre-colonial times, Thailand's fears partially stem from the happenings that followed the establishment of the French protectorate. Though the multiple treaties signed between the French and Siamese in 1904 and 1907 serve as the bases for the present-day border between Cambodia and Thailand, many discrepancies exist to date; one of the prime examples being the tussle over the Preah Vihear temple — a 12th-century monument claimed by both countries. While the temple and a 1 sq. km area around it were ruled in Cambodia's favour by the International Court of Justice, a 4.6 sq. km patch near it is still contested territory. The verdict spurred a conflict between the two nations over the area in 2011, resulting in 28 casualties, including both military personnel and civilians. Preah Vihear is merely emblematic of the crisis. Similar temples, such as the Ta Moan Thom around which the latest shootout transpired, exist as bones of contention. The temples were built during the reign of the Khmer Empire. As is the case with empires, they rise and fall. And wars fought among the neighbouring kingdoms have seen the borders shift and temples change ownership. Like in many other conflicts, here too, the fire may have been lit during the time of conquests and colonialism. However, the nationalists and the ruling class of both countries – Cambodia has an authoritarian regime and Thailand's is a coup-prone establishment — have seen to it that the flames were fanned throughout history to suit them.
